Nicholas J Pappas

April 05, 2006 | Law.com

Weil, Gotshal & Manges partners Jeffrey S. Klein and Nicholas J. Pappas write that one of the more challenging tasks for any employer is carrying out personnel decisions, especially concerning promotion, while trying to avoid discrimination allegations. In recent years, federal courts have articulated stringent requirements that failure-to-promote discrimination claims must meet to survive summary judgment. A review of those cases can help employers avoid such allegations in their workplaces.

By Jeffrey S. Klein and Nicholas J. Pappas

12 minute read

January 08, 2007 | Corporate Counsel

Now that the holiday season is over, employers may be facing fallout from their holiday parties. Employees may file sexual harassment claims or sue for workers' compensation for injuries sustained at office gatherings. Companies also risk being held liable for the conduct of intoxicated workers. It is not too soon to plan to minimize the risks at next year's celebrations, while the experience from this year is fresh, attorneys Jeffrey S. Klein and Nicholas J. Pappas advise.

By Jeffrey S. Klein and Nicholas J. Pappas

12 minute read

August 01, 2011 | New York Law Journal

In their Employment Law column, Jeffrey S. Klein and Nicholas J. Pappas, partners at Weil, Gotshal & Manges, write that a recent Court of Appeals decision does not, in and of itself, establish any new standards for civil rights enforcement in New York City, but it provides a striking example of how employers should expect courts to interpret the broad scope of the NYCHRL's protections against retaliatory conduct.

By Jeffrey S. Klein and Nicholas J. Pappas

11 minute read

August 03, 2009 | New York Law Journal

Jeffrey S. Klein and Nicholas J. Pappas, partners at Weil, Gotshal & Manges, write of In re Hydrogen Peroxide Litigation: The Third Circuit's decision establishes a clear standard for district courts to apply when ruling on contested class certification motions, and the standard enunciated is one likely to be welcomed by class action defendants, as it emphasizes the "rigorous analysis" that district courts must conduct when determining whether all the requirements of Rule 23 have been met. While the standard generally should be beneficial to defendants, the opinion also is likely to result in increased discovery prior to class certification and correspondingly, motions for class certification will likely occur later in the litigation. Defendants will be hard-pressed to limit class discovery given the broad inquiry required of district courts, and they may not wish to do so given the arguments they may want to put forth in opposing plaintiffs' class certification motions.

By Jeffrey S. Klein and Nicholas J. Pappas

12 minute read

December 06, 2010 | New York Law Journal

In their Employment Law column, Jeffrey S. Klein and Nicholas J. Pappas of Weil, Gotshal & Manges discuss possible methods for employers to defend the use of merit- or production-based systems to evaluate and reward employees.

By Jeffrey S. Klein and Nicholas J. Pappas

11 minute read

May 31, 2002 | New York Law Journal

O n March 19, 2002, the United States Supreme Court invalidated a United States Department of Labor (DOL) regulation as being "manifestly contrary" to the Family and Medical Leave of 1993 1 (FMLA). See Ragsdale v. Wolverine World Wide, Inc., 122 S.Ct. 1155 (2002). The regulation at issue, 29 CFR �825.700, provides that any employee`s medical leave of absence from work that is not designated by the employer as FMLA leave by a written notice to the employee, will not count against an employee`s 12-week FMLA l

By Jeffrey S. Klein And Nicholas J. Pappas

14 minute read

February 06, 2006 | New York Law Journal

Jeffrey S. Klein and Nicholas J. Pappas, partners at Weil, Gotshal & Manges, write that if an employee continues to work past the term of his or her employment agreement, some employers think that the relationship has automatically converted to "employment-at-will." Others think the agreement's terms, including non-competition and arbitration clauses, all continue as in the agreement throughout the full employment. In New York, both assumptions are generally wrong.

By Jeffrey S. Klein and Nicholas J. Pappas

13 minute read

October 06, 2008 | New York Law Journal

Jeffrey S. Klein and Nicholas J. Pappas, partners at Weil, Gotshal & Manges, write that the California Supreme Court recently issued a decision rejecting the so-called "narrow-restraint" exception used by courts to find certain noncompetition covenants valid and enforceable in the state of California. Previously, employers had achieved some success in arguing that where a noncompetition agreement did not completely prohibit post-termination competition by an employee, California courts were permitted to enforce the agreement under such an exception.

By Jeffrey S. Klein and Nicholas J. Pappas

13 minute read

June 11, 2007 | Law.com

In Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., the 9th Circuit affirmed a district court's certification of a nationwide employment discrimination class of approximately 1.5 million current and former female Wal-Mart employees. Attorneys Jeffrey S. Klein and Nicholas J. Pappas contend that the 9th Circuit's decision contains numerous conclusions of law that are highly questionable and that will likely be challenged both in that case and in cases pending around the country.

By Jeffrey S. Klein and Nicholas J. Pappas

9 minute read

August 02, 2002 | New York Law Journal

E MPLOYERS HAVE been struggling for some time to understand under what circumstances severance arrangements will be deemed by courts to be "employee welfare benefit plans" and, therefore, subject to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended, 29 USC ��1001-1961 (ERISA). 1

By Jeffrey S. Klein And Nicholas J. Pappas

17 minute read